VARIASI TRANSITIVITAS TEKS TRANSLASIONAL MANGUPA BAHASA MANDAILING-INGGRIS Susi Masniari Nasution

  Kajian Linguistik, Februari 2015, 161-169 Tahun ke-12, No 1 Copyright ©2015, Program Studi Linguistik FIB USU, ISSN 1693-4660

  

VARIASI TRANSITIVITAS TEKS TRANSLASIONAL MANGUPA

BAHASA MANDAILING-INGGRIS

Susi Masniari Nasution

  

Syahron Lubis

Fakultas Ilmu Budaya Universitas Sumatera Utara

  

Asruddin B. Tou

Universitas Yogyakarta

  

Abstrak

Penelitian ini memiliki tiga tujuan utama. Pertama, untuk mendeskripsikan

variasi eksperensial teks translasional yang direalisasikan oleh dan di

dalam teks Mangupa bahasa Mandailing

• –Inggris. Kedua, mengungkapkan

  makna variasi eksperensial teks translasional tersebut dalam konteksnya

  sebagai perealisasi tindak translasional (tindak komunikasi semiotik

  translasional). Ketiga, mendeskripsikan faktor kontekstual yang mendorong

  terjadinya variasi eksperensial. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan

  deskriptif kualitatif. Sumber data penelitian ini adalah berasal dari

  Penerjemahan Teks Mangupa dari bahasa Mandailing ke dalam bahasa

  Inggris oleh Syahron Lubis (2009), teks Mangupa yang terdiri dari 22

  paragraf dan 37 pantun kemudian direalisasikan ke dalam bentuk satuan-

  satuan klausa menjadi 255 data klausa yang terdiri dari 88 teks dan 167

  pantun Mangupa. Analisis data didasarkan teori linguistik sistemik

  fungsional. Berdasarkan analisis data diperoleh hasil bahwa 1) 80,39%

  data menunjukkan variasi keluasan makna pengalaman antara T1 dan T2

  pada teks Mangupa adalah rendah, 2) makna variasi eksperensial teks

  translasional tersebut dalam konteksnya sebagai perealisasi tindak

  translasional (tindak komunikasi semiotik translasional) adalah suatu

  makna pengalaman yang direalisasikan dalam kategori aktivitas/ proses,

  variasi ini dikelompokkan berdasarkan jenis proses dari klausa
• – klausa

  dalam data, kategori proses ini mengalami variasi realisasi terutama dalam

  T2 yang disebabkan karena adanya jarak budaya dan perbedaan sistem

  bahasa, 3) Faktor kontekstual yang mendorong terjadinya variasi

  eksperensial adalah adanya perbedaan sistem bahasa dan budaya yang

  beragam menyebabkan variasi itu muncul sebagai akibat bergesernya

  makna yang diterjemahkan terkadang tidak sepadan/ sesuai dengan makna

  asli teks sumbernya (T1) seperti terdapat perubahan struktural maupun

  perubahan lainnya.

  

Kata kunci: Variasi Ekperensial, Linguistik Sistemik Fungsional, Translasi,

Mangupa

  THE EXPERIENTIAL VARIATION OF TRANSLATIONAL TEXT OF MANGUPA MANDAILING

• – ENGLISH

  Abstract

  

There are three objectives of this study. First, to describe the experiential

variation of translational text found in Mangupa in Mandailing language

  Susi Masniari Nasution

into English. Second, to express the meaning of the experiential variation in

context as the realization of the act of translational semiotic. Third, to

describe the contextual factors suporting the experiential variation. The

research methode used is descriptive qualitative method. The data taken

from the translated text of Mangupa from Mandailing into English by

Syahron Lubis. The data analysed are clauses consisting of 22 paragraphs

and 37 traditional poetry. It classified into 255 clauses consisting of 88 texts

and 167 traditional poetry. The theory used are systemic functional

linguistics and translational approach. The result of study are: there are

80,39% experiential variation expressed low variation; the experiential

variation realized by process, the cultural gap and difference of language

system; contextual factors supporting the experiential variation caused by

the shift occured in the translation process such as the structural shift.

  Keywords: experiential variation, systemic functional linguistics, translational text, mangupa.

  INTRODUCTION Background

  Translation as an activity which has a meaning process from one text into another text. It has manifestation such massage/translation meaning from the source text into target text which has a communication form that involves the semiotic system, it works in context.

  Meaning; the translation involves the language, it consists of every signs or the manifestation of meaning representation. The elements which are in the source language is modified into finge (rambu), symbol, and signal to achieve an equivalency in the target language.

  The meaning of translation is usually to be understood only as the process of meaning transfering between the two languages system. This translation consists of oral,written, or the combination from both of them. Though, the oral translation is often called by the interpretation term (penafsiran). The two activities involve the language as a media of massage carrying/information. Translation is the activity of transferring massage from the source text into target text. In the transferring process, a professional translator will certainly focus on the equivalence (kesepadanan) and it is not merely for the formal correspondence (kesejajaran formal semata). It is caused by the formal correspondence sometimes is not able to transfer the source text (TSu) into target text (TSa) well and admitted, Hoed (2006a: 3) The translation has the variations of objects text from the Quran text, the knowledge text, untill Mangupa text. One of the Mangupa texts for Mandailingnese which is transferred as an expression of said thank or like the advice from the relegious advicer that is showed to someone who has just recovered from the sickness too long which has purpose to give back the spirit (tondi) to the sickman. This expression is not only to be translated as a meaning of said thank but also as an expression of happiness like the wedding traditional, graduation, and etc. This Mangupa Tradition is still remained to be done by Mandailing society in North Sumatera untill now.

  The translation of Mangupa maybe shows the different meaning of the text in English is because of the lang uage‟s gap and culture in both the languages. At a glance, the different context is always colouring in language transferring of text Mangupa, it is

  Kajian Linguistik, Tahun Ke-12, No 1, Februari 2015

  the variations which is not ignored. Possibility the adaptation procedure must be done by the translator with changing the existence of language which is in the source text In this translation research of Mangupa, we know that Mandailing and English have much more differences than similarities specially in language structure such as afectation, compex, formation word, pronomina system, phrase structure, sentence structure, meaning component, polisemi, synonim, antonym, and etc. By there is the structure differences between them, translating the phrase, compex, and sentence from the source text into target text gets the problem.

  One thing that should be attented to the different culture among them either Mandailing society and England with a number of terms and Mandailing‟s culture expressions which have not the equivalency in English and because of the words should be borrowed (tidak diterjemahkan) by giving the explanation of meaning on the glosarium, and some words have equivalency but the culture situation which close to the words are not transferred into English and the meaning should be explained to the glosarium.

  This research discusses about the unique translation of text Mangupa and rich on the specific culture of Mandailing. The unique is judged from advice terms which are conveyed by relegious advicer, family, friends or others for wedding tradition. The specific thing which appeared in Mangupa is lexicon for Mandailing traditional food, which consists of many kinds of food and each kind has the meaning itself. Then there is sekapur sirih which is given to the someone who will be prayed (diupa), a bassom for washing hand, and a glass of sitio

• – tio water, chicken and fish which are closed by some pieces of banana leauf. The term inside behind Mangupa is one of the interest object to be observed.

  Beside that, text Mangupa is language with the variety of semiotic system brings the questions in the topic of multi translation, translating into English. The big statement is how the variations of meaning appeared in language with the different culture situation? This research will be using the two primer data sources, namely: Example: T1 = Songon on ma ikhlas ni roha muyu manjagit pangupa on. (Mandailing)

  S P O T2 = You may accept this pangupa as faithfully as the white. (Engish)

  S P O ` K Meaning : Seikhlas inilah hati kalian menerima pangupa ini.

  Note : T1

  : Mandailing T2 : English S : Subject P : Verb O : Object K : Adverb

  The data above shows the variation of manifestation from the real same meaning, T1 shows three elements are (S,P,O), while T2 shows four elements are (S,P,O,K), it has the shift of position for T2. The phenomenon of manifestation variety like this will be observed deeply. Beside that, the experiential meaning is also seen in based on the process category changing which is used in both the texts, as the example above, that shows verb with different meaning of the verb each other, T2 “manjagit” while T2 “accept”. The difference of the verb shows that there is changing the manifestation of

  meaning which is revealed by T1 and T2. The changing above shows that the openly one

  room for translator to express the meaning who he caught from the source text, without

  Susi Masniari Nasution should be focused on the source text as an „absolutely‟ guidance which should be obeyed.

  Translator by mastering the target text well is guided to reveale the meaning has the same straight way with the rule and the characteristic which is valid on the target text. This phenomenon becomes the interest facta to be observed through the translation research, by the different persfectives which are not seeing the source text as a determination that is the most dominant in the creation meaning of the trnslation text. Beside that, this research is involving the local language, Mandailing. It is as one of language is still lack of observation; moreover, it is connected with the specific translation research. The translation research is generally observing the mainly language (the national language and the foreign language), with all its aspects. Hence, the local language research from this translating may become way toward upgrade the local topics in research of methode, specially the translation research and linguistic.

  By the orientation of the Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) Halliday (1994), the translation research which involve in these two different languages (Mandailing, English) indirectly will be describing the specific characteristics from the two languages from thematic variation of persfective. SFL during this is only functioned for describing English, and as long as the knowledge‟s writer, it‟s never promoted as perfective to take a picture the manisfestation of Indonesia language, it‟s more to observe the local language, specially Mandailing. So, the result of this research indirectly become in the beginning description of Indonesia language and Mandailing from the view of SFL. By the reasons, this research can be called as a valuable to be done. It based on the foundation of view (landasan pemikiran) which is given to the part before, this research focuses on the problem of research as follows:

  1. How is the variation of experiential text translational realized by and in the text Mangupa Mandailing and English? 2. What is the variation of experiential text translational in its context as a translational realizer (the translasional of semiotic communication)?

  3. What is the contextual which is supporting of the experiential variation happent?

  REVIEW OF LITERATURE Theory of Research

  The teories which are chosen as a guider in this research covers the metamorphs concept of translation theory, the translating the text Mangupa, equivalence for the translation, and the translastic conceptual, three of Halliday metafunctions, the experiential of meaning and the clausa. Every theory will be showed on the parts.

a. Translation: The Metamorps Concept

  Nida and Taber (1982: 12) makes the definition of translation is “Reproducing in

  

the receptor language that natural equivalent of the source language massage, first in

term of meaning and second in term of style ”. Meaning, the translation is to re-express the

  massage which is in the source text (BSu) into target text (BSa) by using the possibly equivalence and closed either the meaning or the style of language. That‟s why, the result of the ideal translation is able to be understood easily and TSa is not the result of the translation because using the equivalence of language style with Bsa stye. For getting the equivalence between BSu and BSa, Nida offers the technical addition and the lack of information which is known by the term gain and loss in translation.

  Kajian Linguistik, Tahun Ke-12, No 1, Februari 2015

  Bell (1991: 6) says that the translation as a replacement (pengalihan) of the

  

presentation between one language and one equivalence of representation in the second

of language. Bell (1978) calls that the translation text tries to defend the equivalence of

  meaning and stylistic (1991: 5) Herbet M. Wolf (1998) says that the purpose of the good translation is “to provide

  

an accurate, readable rendition of the original that will capture as much of the meaning

as possible

  ”, means, the main purpose of the translation is to give the translation text which has accurated and easily to be read like a originally with saying the meaning maximally. The reader of the target text becomes as a target to get success in the translating activity. The translation text must attend to the meaningful by easily language form to be understood by the reader of the target text. So, a translator must be able to understand well the meaning which is in the original text and understanding how to say the meaning for the reader of the target text.

  b. The Translation of Text Mangupa

Mangupa is a formal wedding traditional and closed in the society of Mandailing

  which has the purpose especially for giving the wedding advice to the couple. The Mangupa Ceremony is done by datu pangupa in a traditional room, a group of dalihan na

  

tolu, for the couple and others. Text Mangupa is conveyed orally in monolog form and in

  the intern meeting. This text is the explanation text which conveys the phenomenon of explanation regularly. According to Lubis (2009) the main ideology which is basing on text Mangupa is hope which has powerful either physic or heart, the unity and mortality of wedding, safe, and prosperous in the life of the couple. Text Mangupa is translated into Indonesia and English in 2009 by Syahron Lubis. The methode of meaning transferring from the source text into the target text to achieve the accuracy translation, read, valuable, it is to be found to posess much more differences than the similarities in language structure as affictation, compex, reduplication, formation word, phrase structure, meaning component, synonim, antonym, metafore, idiom, and eufemisme. And also to be found that the society of Mandailing and English have the large diferent in cultural aspects like a religion and belief, family, wedding, the society of type, gender gap, using language, and the politeness of society. Because of differences on both the two languages structure, translating the phrase, compex and sentence from the source text into the target text get the problem.

  There is the differences of culture between Mandailing and English cause the number of terms and the expression of Mandailing culture which has not equivalence in English and that is why the words have to be borrowed (tidak diterjemahkan) by giving the meaning explanation for the the glosarium.

  c. Three of Language Metafunction (Halliday,1985,1994,and 2004) Halliday sees that the language is as a source for revealing the meaning. Language

  is as a language style, which is completed by the forms that are used to manifest the meaning. His best theory is Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), it is the theory of meaning as a chosen. By this theory, the language or the other semiotic system can be interpreted as a chosen roaming which is close related each other. The other name of language is semantic system, it consists of some words. This semantic system has lexical vocabulary and grammar which arrange the words in order to get to be functioned to present the realization of meaning as its the main task (Halliday,1985, 1994, and 2004).

  Susi Masniari Nasution d.

   Clause

  Clause here means toward to the grammatical which consists of subject, verb, object, complement, and adverb or not. It means that the caluse is formulated by S,P (O) (COM) (ADV), byt S P as the main remained components, while the next three components have free chosen (manasuka) (Ramlan, 1985: 23). In grammar, clause is the unity of language structure, because it has the identification constituently, by having the structure and grammatical arrangement each other (Blor & Blor, 2004: 7). The clause places the first position in expression of meaning. In clause (tataran clausa), the language user can speak about what ever there is, what happent is, and what the person feels.

  e. The Frame Of Thought

  The frame of thought which is used in this research is

  Tou’s conceptual

  construcftion, which replaces the translat ion or specifically toward to “translational of semiotic communication” (KST) as a form of metasemiotic communication. There are some of observer (book reviewed) who also connected with this research, they are Arif Budiman (2009). This research focused on The study of compare the textual meaning with Obama as a president, Syahron Lubis (2009) his thesis is The Translation of Text Mangupa from Mnadailing into English, Muhizar Mukhtar (2005) in his thesis is The Tematitation in Bilingual Translation, Lutfiyah Alindah (2012) her thesis is The Interpersonal variation of Language Translational Text,etc.

  METHOD OF RESEARCH The Kind of Research

  The purpose of this research is descriptive research, by trying to describ the situation of reseacrh object. This research uses the orientation of qualitatif, it is an description of aplication theory which needs the completely data.

  a. Data and Source of Data

  Data which is used in this reserach is word, phrase, clause which are in text Mangupa from Mandailing into English. This analysis will reveal the technical, methode, and ideology of translation which is applied by translator. This source of data is The Translation of Text Mangupa Mandailing into English by Syahron Lubis (2009).

  DATA ANALYSIS Description

  Analysis will be moved from the variation of manifestation which can be found in data, covering with the manifestation of large experiential meaning (keluasan makna pengalaman) which is identified by the evaluation scale 0-3, it means the lowest of variation up to the highest of variation, the manifestation of variation process which explains with every cahanging of kinds process from T1 to T2.

1. The existence of variation KMP in T1: T2

  The variation KMP oriented to the changing of meaning elements in the clause. The variation of element is also devided into based on the scale from 0

• – 3, by the orientation to what the element is up or down. Basing on the analysis which is to be done, each of the variations are found in three sources of data. The variation zero (0)

  Kajian Linguistik, Tahun Ke-12, No 1, Februari 2015

  is the most dominant variation, it means a great number of meaning from each elements from the clause T1, it is realized by filling in the number of equivalence meaning elements in T2.

  a.

  The Existence of Variation KMP T1: T2 As the explanation before, this variation of clause element covers the addition and deduction. The variation is to be found in T2. The variation of Jawa‟s version additional covers the additional of element process, participant, adverb (circumstance), the deduction of element is known by happing on the element process and participant.

  1). Variation Zero (0) As the explanation before, the variation zero (0) orienting on nothing changing the number of meaning element between T1 and T2. Then some examples which shows the clause with the variation zero (0).

  Pantun 1. (T1) = Mandailing Natuari di mata ni ari Guling Sircumst. (time) Sircumst. Material Verse (T2) = English Yesterday while the sun was setting Sircumst. (time) Sircumst. material Note: The data aboves shows the entire of meaning element from T1 become T2. Each contstituent in T1 all of them attended in T2.

  2). Variation One (1) The variation one (1), when it happent the addition or deduction of sircumstance element. The addition or deduction of this element is admited as the most variation. The addition which is meant by appearance of element before is not to be found in the source of the language. The additional or deduction has one (1) value when it involve the circums of element which is usually presented by preposition phrase or adervial group. The sircumstan which is added the various namely; place, manner, and purpose.

  3). Variation two (2) The variation two is the variation which involve participant; compliment. The existence of compliment in the clause can be object, either directly or indirectly. One of the additions of complement participant is appearance of the attributif –complement for the clause by the proces of attributif – relation.

  4). Variation three (3) The changing a mount of meaning elements which involve the element of participant meaning (pelaku).

  CONCLUSION

  Based on the analysis which has been done to the chapter before, can be taken the congclusion as the answers from the question of research which is formulated.

  Susi Masniari Nasution 1.

  The existence of experiential variation between T1 and T2 involve all of possibility variation from the variation zero (0) till variation of three (3), by dominating the variation of zero (1) which is very looking diferent for T1 and T2. Means, there is additional and deduction for all of kinds of experiences meaning, from the sircumstan, complement participant, actor, and changing of process, and the addition or deduction of meaning units/clause which happent in translation of action.

  2. The existence of variation process covers the variety of changing from one process to another process. The variation of process which is found shows that 52 variation of process. T2 often modificates the kinds of any process to become a proces of existence.

  3. The variation of experiential degree is not always implicated on the changing of experiential. The changing a mount of meaning elements is not always implicate on lossing or addition meaning in its new realization.

  4. The experiential variation is low. It caused by there is intrinsic factors (no changed) and extrinsic factors. Intrinsic shows that there is no changed in gramatical context either subject or verb has the same position T1:T2 ( Mangupa Mandailing – English). Extrinsic shows that there is the same cultural context; mode, tenor, and the same field.

  5. The different culture has caused the variation was appeared. One of the effects the variation was appeared is caused by the sifts especially for the structural or the other changed. This research is not taking all the categories analysis yet to give the good explanation.

  REFERENCE

  Bell, Roger T. (1991). Translation and Translating: Theory and Practice, London and New York: Longman

  B.Milles and Huberman, (1992). Qualitative Data Analysis. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia (UI. Press). Catford, (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press. Chaer, (2007). Linguistik Umum, Jakarta: Rineka Cipta. Diapari, (1990). Adat

• – Istiadat Perkawinan Dalam Masyarakat Batak Tapanuli Selatan, Patuan Naga Humala Parlindungan. Jakarta.

  Hoed, (2006a). Teori dan Masalah Penerjemahan: Sebuah Pengantar Ringkas. Jakarta Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

  Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold. Hoed. (2006). Penerjemahan dan Kebudayaan. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya. Hoed. (2006). Teori dan Masalah Penerjemahan: Sebuah Pengantar Ringkas. Jakarta:

  ProDC Hatim. (1997). The Translator as Communicator. London: Routledge 11- New Fetter Lane.

  Larson, ML. (1989). Penerjemahan Berdasar Makna: Pedoman untuk Pemadanan antar Bahasa (Terjemahan Kencanawati Taniran) . Jakarta: Arcan.

  Kajian Linguistik, Tahun Ke-12, No 1, Februari 2015

  Lubis. (2009). Penerjemahan Teks Mangupa dari Bahasa Mandailing ke dalam Bahasa

  Inggris. Disertasi – FIB USU: Medan – Sumatera Utara.

  Lubis. (1997). Adat Hangoluan Mandailing, Tapanuli Selatan. Machali, (2009). Pedoman Bagi Penerjemah. Bandung: Kaifa, Mirzan Pustaka. Martin, J. R. (1985). Factual Writing Chalengging Social Reality. Vicoria: Deakin University.

  Munday, J. (2001). Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. London: Routledge. Nida and Taber, (1982): 12. The Theory and Practice of Translation. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Newmark. (1988). A Textbook Of Translation. Prentice Hall International (UK) Nida, EA. (1964). Toward a Science Of Translating. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

  Nida, E. A And Charles R. Taber, (1969). The Theory and Practice of Translation.

  Leiden: E. J. Brill Nababan, MR. (2008). Teori Menerjemahkan Bahasa Inggris. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

  Nasution. Pandapotan. (2001). Acara Magupa di Mandailing, Angkola, Sipirok, dan Padang Lawas. Medan: Yayasan Parsarimpunan ni Tondi. Savory. (1968). The Art of Translation. London: Jonathan Cope.s Saragih. (2011). Semiotik Bahasa: Tanda, Penanda dan Petanda Dalam Bahasa, Medan: Universitas Negeri Medan. Saragih. (2006). Bahasa dalam Konteks Sosial. Medan: PPs Unimed. Sinar. (2010). Teori dan Analisis Wacana: Pendekatan Linguistik Sistemik Fungsional.

  Medan: Pustaka Bangsa Press. Syihabuddin, (2002). Teori dan Praktik Penerjemahan Arab-Indonesia. Bandung: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.

  Tou, A. B. (2008). An SFL-inspired framework of Translation: Translation Semiotic Communication Model. Journal of Modern Language 18: 15---4

  Tou. A. B. (2008). An SFL-inspired framework of Translation: a Translation Semiotic Communication Model . Journal of Modern Language 18: 15---40. Ullmann, (1977): 30. Pengantar Semantik. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelaja